Tuesday 13 October 2020

Annual Revisions of OROP - Beneficial or Contraindicated?

 It is argued that there should be an annual equalisation of OROP based on the prevailing pension of officers retiring in that year in the same rank and same qualifying service. The argument is that pension would increase every year.

 

Perhaps, but I request a learned and simple answer to each of my following doubts: -

 

1. The time scale based promotion from Fg Offr (Lt) up to and including rank of Wg Cdr (Lt Col) is 2, 6. and 13 years mentioned collectively as Zero year below.

 

2. The start (Zero year) of pay band (Basic Pay + Grade Pay) in 6th CPC is Flt Lt (Capt) Rs 24700, Sqn Ldr (Major) Rs 30410 and Wg Cdr (Lt Col) Rs 45400 respectively. 

Does the start of the Pay band (Basic Pay + GP) change by 3% every year i.e Zero + 1 year, Zero + 2 years etc? 

Illustratively, in Zero+1 year will the Pay Band start at Rs 25440, Rs 31300 and Rs 46760 respectively?

Or will the newly promoted Flt Lt (Capt), Sqn Ldr (Major) and Wg Cdr (Lt Col) start at Rs 24700, Rs 30410 and 45400 as in Zero year?

 

3. Now, supposing in Zero year there is a Wg Cdr (Lt Col) whose 23 years QS comprise 6 years in the Ranks + 17 years as Commissioned Officer. His Basic Pay + Grade Pay would be Rs 52000 and RE Rs 58000 & Pension Rs 29000 is the minimum while the maximum in the same rank with 23 years commissioned service has Basic Pay + Grade Pay would be Rs 61000 and RE Rs 67000 (Pension Rs 33500). 

The average RE would be Rs 56000 and Pension Rs 28000. Correct?

 

4. Next, in Zero+1 year, there is a Wg Cdr (Lt Col) whose 23 years QS comprises 9 years in the Ranks + 14 years as Commissioned Officer. His Basic Pay + Grade pay would be Rs 46800 and RE Rs 52800 & Rs Pension 26400 is the minimum, while the maximum in the same rank has 23 years commissioned Service and their Basic Pay + Grade Pay would be Rs 61000 and RE Rs 67000 (Pension Rs 33500).

The average RE would be Rs 53900 and Pension Rs 26950. Correct?

 

 

             

9 comments:

  1. Sir, I recall this issue being discussed on one of your blog posts in the past.

    Actual pay fixations on 6 CPC pay-bands would have varied on account of increments at the time of migration to 6 CPC from 5 CPC.

    The starting pay of Lt Col was 38530 in PB4 as per amendment 2/S/08 to SAI.

    But, actual pay vis-a-vis QS data may have to be obtained from CDA or Air Force/Naval accounts to actually get the complete picture.

    I have updated some data for OROP vs PB4 based pensions. There is no way to explain the gaps other than through obtaining hard data in the suggested format I had mentioned on Twitter.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Because of bunching of the increments, people used to lose at the time of pay revisions given by the Pay Commissions. If A Sqn Ldr had 6 increments in the old scale, he used to get probably only 2-3 increments in the revised scale. However a new Sqn Ldr would get 3 increments after 3 years of service (in due course of time) as Sqn Ldr whereas the Old Sqn Ldr of 6 years service got only 3 increments. Hence yearly/periodic revision of OROP was conceptualised.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sir, from what I understand in my (silly?) reading of the formula adopted by successive Pay Commissions from 4th CPC onwards is that previous RE (Reckonable Emoluments) would be multiplied by say 40% from 4 to 5 CPC, 1.84 from 5 to 6 CPC and 2.57 from 6 CPC to 7 CPC.
      Hence all increments earned in the previous CPC would be multiplied to obtain the revised scale.

      Delete
  3. Because of bunching of the increments, people used to lose at the time of pay revisions given by the Pay Commissions. If A Sqn Ldr had 6 increments in the old scale, he used to get probably only 2-3 increments in the revised scale.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Sir, for 6 CPC, Basic Pay was defined as (Pay-in-payband+GP).

    Para 2: I'd read in SAFI and SNI of 2008 that increment would be 3% of (Pay-in-payband+GP) rounded up, this would be added to the "Basic-Pay" to get the next "Basic-Pay". The next pay-in-payband would be This "next "basic-pay minus grade-pay. But it may be best to confirm with someone from the Accts Branch.

    I feel the pay-band for Wg Cdr was always constant and did not change from year zero to zero+1. It started with one increment after the lower end of pay-in-payband of 37400. "Basic Pay" for Wg Cdr started with 46530 i.e. pay-in-payband of 38530. In what you have termed as "Zero+1" year, the Wg Cdr would get "Basic Pay" of 47690 and would have pay-in-payband of 39690. But his QS would be one year more. It would be difficult to generalize how the pay of subsequent promotees had been fixed. But as this is historic data, information may well be available.

    Para 3The initial fixation of a Wg Cdr with 23 years transiting from 5th to 6th CPC would need to be studied from records. Again, it is difficult to generalize how many increments anyone would have got at the time. There is an additional complication. I recall being told that Branch Commissioned Officers too picked up the rank of Wg Cdr after 16 Dec 2004. Now how their pay, and subsequently pension, was fixed is again something someone from the Accts branch may be in a position to throw some light on.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sir, the amounts mentioned are "Live" examples obtained from Accts branch personnel. It is based on the contention that "average" changes every year, not necessarily to the benefit. Which means the average OROP this year may be higher than the average OROP next year!

      Delete
    2. Sir, I think that is why this extremely cumbersome manner of getting data of max and min pensions for a specific period was not a practical way of introducing OROP.

      But if there is variation from year to year, then all the more reason for the review to be done at more frequently intervals. If, say in 2018, the min and max pension levels for some QS-rank combinations yielded a lower average than the one for the same QS-rank combination in 2013, then the higher OROP would need to continue for that combination from 2019. But if for another QS-rank combination the average of 2018 turned out to be higher, then the OROP for that QS-rank combination would increase from 2019.

      But the chief concern is what were the actual max and min figures used in 2013 and who were the actual veterans who had retired with those pensions in 2013?

      Such information may also be required at the next revision due from 2019. Otherwise, what is to stop a process of application of some thumb rule at some level for getting the next set of OROP tables prepared?

      Delete
  5. RTI replies have yielded the following information:-
    With qualifying service of 23.5 years, minimum pension was Rs 26965/- and maximum pension was Rs 33215 for Lt Col/Wg Cdr in the year 2013.
    The maximum pension was Rs 91600/- and minimum pension was Rs 86800/- in the year 2018.
    The OROP pension however being given at the present is Rs 83340/-

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The figures quoted by you are pretty close to pension levels that, by logic, would have been automatically reached by following a rational notional progression. There would have been no need for getting minimum and maximum pensions. 7CPC fixation would have been as good as any OROP, if not better. Link to an old table follows.

      But as things stand, the pension levels mentioned would, in all probability, be close to desirable levels of parity till the QS of 23/24 years, after which there is likely to be an ever increasing gap between levels for proper parity and pension actually fixed, as seen at the time of the first OROP fixation from 2014.

      The link 👉🏼 http://bit.ly/2LFW4Wb

      Delete